This morning I posted a little note on Twitter…
No disrespect to President Obama, but awarding the Peace Prize based on the “idea” he’s changing diplomacy w/o any proper effects is odd/bad
Some peeps hit me up, privately and publicly, to tell me either A) Obama totally has changed the world (one point of view which seems to be extreme leftist) or B ) this isn’t the first time the Nobel committee has awarded based on potential merit or pushing people in the right direction.
It really left me to think about why it frustrated me so much. Sure the (A) group of people are going to be Pro-bama no matter what, just as the Fox News watching chest thumpers were Pro Bush no matter what. The (B) group made me realize, the Nobel nominating group seems to be more like old media and old organizations than anyone had realized.
There’s this notion that media is owned by its creator, and once you send it out there, someone consumes it and they have no stake in the media being consumed. As any producer will tell you though, that’s not exactly true. Most media creators make things for people to consume in interesting ways that change and shape their lives. I’m talking any type of art, or news, or whatever.
Once you put something out there, it isn’t just the media creators anymore, its put in the fabric of society and starts to shift how other media is created and how society consumes it. Of course, that’s the basic premise of remix culture that’s sort of sprang up.
People need to realize if they’re creating something that the world looks at, they can’t do it SOLELY for the audience. Then, it’s pop music / American Idol, which feels cheap, tasteless and devoid of innovation. (Sorry Seacrest.)
But, if you create SOLELY for your insular group, you’re elitist, snobbish and whatever derogetory adjective you’d like to assign to someone who thinks regular people aren’t worth meddling with.
By giving Obama the prize before any big middle east event has been solved, or we’re actually friends with Iran, or some crisis is averted, it’s saying “we christen you to be the peacemaker.” Which, as a “regular person” feels like they picked Obama because they buy into the hype.
I’m not saying Obama is all hype. I still have high hopes for what’s happening. But, frankly, the effects of Obama-nomics won’t be known for YEARS. The Afghan conflict is intensifying, not becoming more peaceful. I personally believe the Afghan commanders are smarter than they have been in the past, and this troop buildup could be the thing that fixes Afghan for us.
Even with all that, the fact is there’s no tangible evidence that Obama did the most to promote peace, etc. It confuses EVERYONE in the world who sees people get it in the past who are actively doing things get the prize, and then think “yo, I’ve got potential!” even though, sure, we’re not exactly president.
Sometimes people do things for insular reasons because that’s how they think the process works, not realizing that they don’t really own the process. They’re representatives of how we view the world, and their insular process is somehow theoretically correct, but very externally confusing.
I think, on a tangent, that’s what’s been lost in media, right? People have all these private debates about issues and problems which are important to the editorial groups, but on the flipside, they lose general perspective of real people. As a result, we get shitty things like Fox News which are SO on the other side of the fence and being blatantly annoyingly biased, that it makes people sort of try to be more centered. Anyway, people don’t own their creations when the public consumes them. Public facing things need to involve the last party in the process. The public has to be part of the process, I think, (See software, music industry, etc.) or else processes lose credibility and relevance if ignored for too long.
But hey, I guess we don’t NEED a Nobel peace prize.
Recent Comments